Forum:Want a better name than "Campaign Wikia"?
Related Pages * There's an online ranked ballot poll on the name of this wiki. Read the stuff below, and then please vote in it. * This page is related to a forum thread to change the name of the wiki to something to do with Unity as an idea or possibly as a reference to the Unity Movement. The Discussion I don't like having "Wikia" in the title, I'd rather just call it a wiki. Why does the hosting arrangement belong in the name? I don't like that its just called "Campaigns" because that is a generic word and hard to use to uniquely identify this site/community. Contrast this with "Wikipedia". "Wikipedia" as a name, uses a newly coined word to say "we are building an encyclopedia in a wiki". Moreover, I don't think we even know what the goal of this place can or should be, yet I've seen comments in various places that the name implies a mission and the mission implies an editorial policy. This happened in wikipedia too... but wikipedia had a good name... I don't have any particular name to suggest in it's place, I'd just like to maybe work on something. Does anyone have better ideas for the name of this place? - JenniferForUnity 00:24, 17 July 2006 (UTC) :"Wiki" is a good generic name to use when referring to the site in casual writing here. But "Wikia" is the name of the company that supports it, and it distinguishes it from other companies, some of whom charge for the use of their wikis. So I support keeping "Wikia" in the title. "Campaigns" is a better argument for ditching, however. It can be (and has been) misconstrued that this is simply a voter guide in which all campaigns in the U.S. (and perhaps the world) are simply listed and debated. For the sake of brevity, I like "Campaigns" but since you asked about alternatives, perhaps a name such as "Reform Politics" or "New Politics" may have worked, too. Still, I vote to keep "Campaigns" for now, unless there's a groundswell of opposition to it. As for the mission, that is under discussion, but I share your concerns, but for the opposite reason: It is not narrow enough, and I am unsure what the editorial policy you speak of is, exactly. It's pretty much a free-wheeling edit free-for-all right now, which can *possibly* bring some good things to the site, but has also brought some very negative things to it. - Nhprman 03:09, 17 July 2006 (UTC) ::Nhprman, the policy I referred to isn't written. It was in someone's head when they were arguing on a talk page (maybe on main's talk? I can't remember) who I saw arguing that this was a "Campaigns" site and so it should focus on "such and such". - JenniferForUnity 04:59, 17 July 2006 (UTC) ::Well, so far at least, what's been happening focuses a lot more on political issues than campaigns. It's maybe too early to tell yet whether this trend will continue. If this trend does continue, maybe "Politics" or "Government" instead of "Campaign" would be more telling to people coming to it for the first time. - Munchtipq 03:36, 17 July 2006 (UTC) :::Politics is already taken. There are a large number of Wikia sites listed in the Politics Portal, with more in the Category. There was even an Electionville site set up to list candidates and campaigns. They were all ignored. I'm hoping this wikia site spreads itself out a little bit. Helps the others get off the ground. We'll see. :::Campaigns is the center of attention right now, and has the most support from the Wikiverse. Let's see where it goes. Chadlupkes 03:48, 17 July 2006 (UTC) ::::Just to play with compressing "what the wiki's theme is" down to a single word: Maybe "Wikiocracy" (nope, it already exists and has 100 users, 300 pages, and is more rigidly conceived as a body of editable laws)... Wikiarchy seems to have existed and closed up shop. Hmmm... if the arguments in favor of respecting and making places for POV win out then maybe the site could be an ecology of propaganda... Wikiganda? Propawiki?. "The Wikiplace of Ideas"? - JenniferForUnity 04:59, 17 July 2006 (UTC) :::::If this wiki become a place for flamewars over partisan issues, Propawiki and Wikiganda sound about right (although Wikiganda should probably be reserved for a future wiki for Uganda...LOL!) If it moves toward a mission of enlightening the debate over how we conduct campaigns in a way that respects the voter, then I'm voting for "Better Campaigns" or "New Politics." - Nhprman 06:53, 18 July 2006 (UTC) Just a technical note, the title (that appears in the tag of every page) can be changed easily via this message: MediaWiki:Sitetitle. However, to change the Project: namespace as well as the value of will take intervention by the technical staff. You could change the message as a test, see what people liked, before requesting a total change. --Splarka (talk) 03:55, 17 July 2006 (UTC) : I'm assuming if a better name bubbles up the technical stuff can be managed. Maybe this is a false assumption? - JenniferForUnity 04:59, 17 July 2006 (UTC) ::It is a correct assumption. However, there may be complaints afterwards from users who had no idea this was under debate. Making a slight change (such as just the title) could make them more aware and able to be involved. Also possible is for Chad to put up a note in MediaWiki:Sitenotice like: Note: Please let your thoughts known on possibly changing the title of this wiki, at this topic . --Splarka (talk) 05:05, 17 July 2006 (UTC) :::I'm going to want Jim to weigh in on this first. He started the site and chose Campaigns. Chadlupkes 17:22, 17 July 2006 (UTC)